The other day, a benevolent Cameroonian in the DC metropolis called here and suggested we change the headline of our story “Cameroon Ambassador refers to Anglophones as Nigerians.” In his opinion, the facts in the body of the story were presented very accurately, but for the headline.

Many in social media have also questioned the astuteness of the headline. We appreciate their right to holding us accountable for what we do here.

However, at the Cameroon Journal, we do not arrive at headlines for mere sensational purposes. As Ntemfac Ofege and Fon Lucas have commented elsewhere, today’s news isn’t all about presentation of raw facts – it’s also about making the facts have perspective. And of course, perspective always lies in the eyes/face of the beholder.

As far as that particular story is concerned, we narrated the facts – actually quoting most of them. We equally presented a raw video clip of the Ambassador’s comments from the event and in our own volition; we concluded in the headline that Ambassador Foe Atangana was actually referring to Anglophone Cameroonians as Nigerians.

When you are writing a piece for which sources that are supposed to furnish you with answers are uncooperative as in the case with the Cameroon Embassy in Washington DC, you are left with no choice but to try to put into perspective what the source was actually trying to say.

We arrived at that headline because there exist no evidence; – it cannot be true that six million Nigerians live in Cameroon. The Ambassador was entirely wrong. We do not have to try proving it here. But the Cameroon gov’t to which the Ambassador is an integral part has the benefit of the facts as obtained in yearly censuses. Let them present it.

Playing the devil’s advocate for a moment, if indeed six million Nigerians live in Cameroon, then combined with the population of the Northwest and Southwest regions, won’t we have more English speaking Cameroonians than Francophones? But that isn’t and has never been the case. And that is the reason we stated in the story that the ambassador either “wittingly or unwittingly,” referred to Southern Cameroonians as Nigerians.

However, whether he did so deliberately or not, our headline was informed by the fact that it wasn’t the first time a high ranking official in the Biya administration will be referring to Southern Cameroonians as Nigerians?

That label has been used before and we all know that. Anglophones have been told before that they are Biafrans – remember when the opposition SDF was launched? The Yaounde regime told the world it was Nigerians not Anglophones who launched the party. They said they saw Nigerian flags flying in Bamenda etc.

Still, in the early 90s, Anglophone students in the University of Yaounde were told if they didn’t like the system and the way they were being treated they could go to Nigeria – where they came from? Remember the phrase “Les Biafra la?” (Excuse the French)!

The point is that Ambassador Foe made a very ill informed insensitive statement and since the embassy will not respond to our request for clarifications, we gave it the perspective that the Cameroon gov’t has promoted in the past. We have no apology for that.

The problem isn’t really with our reporting. The real problem lies with the Cameroon gov’t’s choice of diplomats to exclusively English speaking countries and of course, Ambassador Foe.

The Ambassador has never in any occasion demonstrated that he is capable of elaborating a good point in comprehensible English in spite of the fact that he served in Calabar, Nigeria, a predominantly English country before his posting to the U.S mission. And things are made worse with his strong French accent, yet, he will not abstain or keep to himself when circumstances demand he does.

Some Cameroonians who were present in that Capitol Hill chamber when the Ambassador spoke have said they covered their heads in shame of what the ambassador did. So incoherent and unable to express himself that so many questioned what he was exactly trying to say. But again, the Ambassador is only part of a bigger problem.

The regime in Yaounde is the real problem. How can a country that preaches bilingualism as a doctrine continue to post ambassadors to countries they cannot communicate effectively with? In London, USA, Nigeria, Canada, diplomats posted there have been predominantly French speakers – with very little ability to speak english.

If President Biya doesn’t have the wisdom of appointing real bilingual diplomats to such important countries, why can’t he, at least, for once, appoint Anglophones to those positions knowing that they represent the country better with their ability to communicate with the host country? Why is the President afraid of appointing an Anglophone ambassador say to the U.S – even Nigeria?

Besides gov’t policy as it appears – not appointing truly bilingual diplomats to our embassies, another thing killing the embassies in general is their inability to work with the press or see the press as partners of progress.

We called the embassy on Monday April 27 requesting clarifications on Ambassador Foe’s remarks. We were promised a swift response by a communication centre personnel who deliberately won’t disclose his name. He told us he was going to forward our request to the Ambassador and would get back to us before we go to press.

However, we waited three days after and there came no reply by email or phone. We made a second attempt to reach the ambassador’s office and the phones rang straight to the answering machine all the times. Since they will not respond to us, we gave the story the headline we did because it wasn’t the first time a gov’t official will refer to Anglophone Cameroonians as Nigerians.

Maybe we would have had a different perspective had the embassy responded to our request – whatever the case, let the Ambassador or the Cameroon gov’t proof that there are six million Nigerians in Cameroon first.